Judge Nap On Spending: You Don't Cut Cancer Out One Cell At A Time, You Cut It All


#1

Judge Napolitano On Spending: 'You Don’t Cut Cancer Out One Cell At A Time, You Cut It All Out’
Varney & Co | Fox Business | January 3, 2012

[Judge Napolitano On Spending: 'You Don't Cut Cancer Out One Cell At A Time, You Cut It All Out' - YouTube](http://youtu.be/2Nq_V6Bc65A)

On Wednesday, Judge Napolitano weighed in on the fiscal cliff deal, going after Republicans for failing to do the job that they were sent to Washington to do.

Now, the next battle in Washington looms, with the U.S. debt ceiling needing to be increased once again. The judge believes once the debt ceiling hits, the government should stop borrowing money and immediately cut spending across the board to “live within our means.”

“When you have a cancer, you cut it out. Not a cell at a time, you cut out the cancerous organ!” said Napolitano on Fox Business Network’s ‘Varney & Co.’

That prompted Stuart Varney to ask what would happen if the U.S. government cut out so much spending all at once.

“If the government shrank the government, if it shrank each department by 10 percent, it would save a great deal of money. There would be a lot less obligation on the part of debt service for us to pay. I know there would be an initial reverberation here, you could call it an earthquake if you want, because we are so addicted to government borrowing,” said Napolitano.

Varney argued there would be “an immediate economic crash,” but Napolitano countered that the country would get through it and be “far better off in the long run.”

Varney then brought up one specific example of how drastic cuts in spending impact the economy. For instance, a meat inspector in Iowa who is paid by the federal government. If his job is cut, and the meat isn’t getting inspected, then by law it can not go to market, Varney explained.

“You really were taught by socialists at the London School of Economics, weren’t you?” joked Napolitano. Varney said he agrees with Napolitano’s desire for a balanced budget, but does not concur that it can be done immediately.


#2

People like Varney and Napolitano et al, each take a different view. Varney IS an economist and financial advisor, Napolitano is a lawyer. Nappy is correct in his analysis of cutting the cancer completely. BUT in this day in age with the boneheads in congress cutting fingernails is a chore. Varney takes a more practical view but just look at the fiscal cliff agreement---------------- PORK already!!! these assh*les cannot help themselves. And the populace is the poorer for it, and because WE KEEP voting them in, I guess we deserve what they do to us. I had listened to King this morning DEFENDING the fetid pork largess. A conservative??? right???


#3

King is the probably the most disgusting congressman. He’s 100% for a police state, in favor of an ‘assault weapons’ ban, don’t give two sh*ts about the 4th or 5th amendments. The guy makes me want to puke.


#4

only if he is talking about cancer, if he thinks thats a practical way to balance the budget, pay down the debt and continue to having a growing economy hes out of his mind. just another example of the rhetoric where people use cliches and analogies instead of having the actual argument.


#5

We can either balance the budget and bite the bullet now, or continue the spending orgy and suffer much more and for longer in the future.